I am grateful to "Chess Arbiters Association" Newsletter for this comment from the head of the "Anti Cheating Commission",

" “A player is allowed to ask for protection from an arbiter. Of course he can. There are two things he cannot do: write on every wall that XXX is a cheater (as this will likely lead to a sanction from both Ethics and/or a civil court) AND ﬁle a report where all he says to support his claim that the opponent cheated is “ XXX played too well for his rang”. This is a manifestly unfounded accusation. However, turn that “XXX played too well for his rang” into "XXX was scarcely concentrating, was walking all the me, going to the toilet, wore a cap and a wig AND played like a computer as is shown by the following evidence [data follows]” and the accuser will never be prosecuted, even if ACC cannot ﬁnd the player guilty for whatever reason.” "

This is all fair enough, and I did encounter a player (before guidelines were in place) saying that his opponent must be cheating because he wasn't strong enough to get a good position against the accuser! But the first sentence is really great. "A player is allowed to ask for protection from an arbiter." This implies the arbiter is a threat (which may be the case of course)!

The author didn't have English as a first language, so I do sympathise with any confusion.

My friend received a tip that someone in his section, a front-runner, was cheating by using a phone between his legs. I'm not sure if I should name the "alleged" cheater by name here - it feels like an improper venue so I won't, and I believe in the right to face one's accusers.

During one of his games, my friend walked up right behind this player and looked down, over his shoulder, and saw the phone, in plain sight. He didn't yell "phone!" right then as perhaps he should have (though of course it's very hard to bring yourself to do this in a silent tournament hall, no matter how right it is), and wanted to get back to his game, but he alerted a CCA tournament director.

I'm not sure what UK arbiters would expect a spectator to do if they spotted an in use mobile phone, but in a UK tournament a mobile phone in possession (as opposed to on the table or in a bag) would result in a loss. That doesn't leave room for arguments that the player was only reading their emails, checking train times etc.

I'm not sure what UK arbiters would expect a spectator to do if they spotted an in use mobile phone ...

I'd hope they'd expect the spectator to follow the rules (Law 12.7) - "If someone observes an irregularity, he may inform only the arbiter. Players in other games must not to speak about or otherwise interfere in a game. Spectators are not allowed to interfere in a game."

The more interesting question is how far the arbiter would go in attempting to find the phone if an initial search failed to find it - assume the spectator was wrong, or even deliberately making false accusations, and do nothing more, or proceed with a search of the player's "clothes, bags, other items or body" (Law 11.3.3).

A very difficult situation arose yesterday in the 2018 US Open when a player died during play. The announcement from the USCF hasn't said who it is yet until the family have been fully informed.

Paul Truong said on FB "Due to this unexpected and tragic event, play was stopped for hours and it was just resumed at 8 pm local time. What is the rule for play stoppage of an entire event? How can cheating be avoided if players were free to leave the playing hall? I honestly do not know what is the right, sensible, and fair way to handle something like this."

To be honest I found his remarks about cheating quite disgusting given that someone had died. I must admit I have been at events, quite a while ago now, where players have collapsed and after a bit of a commotion play, just carried on, which in retrospect seems entirely heartless. However, Truong's main point, asking what the rules are in such situations, or what the tournament directors/arbiters should have done is a valid one. This was the last round as well.

I have been at events, quite a while ago now, where players have collapsed and after a bit of a commotion play, just carried on

Indeed, English sang froid is legendary.

A few years ago in a club match my opponent made his move and then said "My friend on board 5 is having a heart attack. Would you mind agreeing a draw? I'd like to keep him company until the ambulance arrives." Play continued as normal on the other boards.